On Tue, May 06, 2025 at 03:48:55PM -0700, Junio C Hamano wrote: > No, this is not about a quiz on regexp compatibility between Perl > and sed. > > Back when cdbdc6bf (t: refactor tests depending on Perl substitution > operator, 2025-04-03) rewrite many use of perl with sed, the general s/rewrite many use/rewrote many uses/ > pattern of the original scripts were > > chmod +w some_read_only_file && > perl -p -e "regexp to munge" some_read_only_file >some_tmp && > mv some_tmp some_read_only_file > > persumably because the author new replacing some_read_only_file with s/new/knew? > diff --git a/t/t6011-rev-list-with-bad-commit.sh b/t/t6011-rev-list-with-bad-commit.sh > index b6f3344dbf..1dd1e50d21 100755 > --- a/t/t6011-rev-list-with-bad-commit.sh > +++ b/t/t6011-rev-list-with-bad-commit.sh > @@ -38,6 +38,7 @@ test_expect_success 'verify number of revisions' \ > test_expect_success 'corrupt second commit object' ' > for p in .git/objects/pack/*.pack > do > + chmod +w "$p" && > sed "s/second commit/socond commit/" "$p" >"$p.munged" && > mv "$p.munged" "$p" || > return 1 Ok, the fix makes sense. Thanks! Patrick
